New York City socialist candidate Zohran Mamdani cruised to victory on Tuesday night, defying the laundry list of critics who railed against him over several high-profile controversial stances and statements.

Communist label

Mamdani dismissed the ‘communist’ label throughout the campaign, maintaining that he is a democratic socialist.

His past comments promoting the abolition of private property, seizing the means of production, claiming billionaires shouldn’t exist, and calling for free government programs earned him the communist label from some, including President Donald Trump. 

Mike Gonzalez, the Angeles T. Arredondo E Pluribus Unum Senior Fellow at The Heritage Foundation, told Fox News Digital earlier this year that Mamdani is ‘absolutely a communist’ who ‘repeats lines out of the ‘Communist Manifesto’ and other writings by Karl Marx.’

‘When Marxists today say they are socialists, they usually want to convey the impression that they believe in elections and not just in shooting your way into power,’ Gonzalez added. ‘Of course, that election often ends up being the last free and fair one. Witness Venezuela.’

Anti-Israel positions

Days before the election, an antisemitism research institute released a comprehensive report that summarized its concerns about Mamdani’s stances on Israel and concluded he shouldn’t become the next mayor of New York City.

Mamdani faced heated criticism on the campaign trail, including hundreds of rabbis signing a letter opposing him for positions dating back to his time in college co-founding his school’s Students for Justice in Palestine chapter all the way up to this year when he was hesitant to definitively condemn the term ‘globalize the intifada.’

Mamdani sparked a political firestorm last month, drawing outrage from the law enforcement community after posting a smiling photo with Imam Siraj Wahhaj, a Brooklyn cleric who served as a character witness for the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and has been a longtime defender of convicted terrorists, raising funds for their legal defenses.

Mamdani, a 34-year-old New York state assembly member, has been an outspoken critic of Israel and has even vowed to have Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrested if he visits New York City. 

‘I call Zohran Mamdani a jihadist because he is. Zohran Mamdani is a raging anti-Semite,’ New York GOP Rep. Elise Stefanik said in August. 

‘Mamdani is the definition of a jihadist as he supports Hamas terrorists which he did as recently as yesterday, when he refused to call for Hamas terrorists to put down their arms — the same Hamas terrorist group that slaughtered civilians including New Yorkers on October 7, 2023.’

In July, a Jewish advocacy group blasted Mamdani for sharing a video mocking Hanukkah Jewish traditions on social media.

Mamdani also faced criticism over the anti-Israel positions of his Columbia University professor father, Mahmood, who previously compared Abraham Lincoln to Adolf Hitler and appeared sympathetic to suicide bombers in a book he authored.

‘I think critiques of the state of Israel are critiques of a government, as opposed to critiques of a people and of a faith,’ Mamdani told MSNBC this week. ‘And my job is to represent every single New Yorker, and I will do so no matter their thoughts and opinions on Israel and Palestine, of which millions of New Yorkers have very strong views — and I’m one of them.’ 

Defunding the police

Public safety was one of the most talked about issues on the campaign trail, resulting in a constant debate about Mamdani’s calls in 2020 to ‘defund the police.’

Before his mayoral campaign, Mamdani called the New York Police Department ‘racist’ and said in 2023, ‘We have to make clear that when the boot of the NYPD is on your neck, it’s been laced by the IDF.’

‘I think what scares a lot of New Yorkers about the policy positions taken by Zohran Mamdani over the years is that he has exhibited not just a lack of appreciation for the men and women that stand on that [police] line, but a visceral disdain for them, which has led him to push for things like defunding and dismantling the police,’ Rafael A. Mangual, senior fellow and head of research for policing and public safety at the Manhattan Institute, told Fox News Digital in August, shortly after a gunman killed four people in midtown Manhattan, including a NYPD police officer. 

‘It’s not so much as just that he said, well, I wanna allocate some of this money to other places. He has gone so far as to say that we should dismantle the entire department.’

Mamdani attempted to distance himself from his previous positions on the campaign trail and apologized to them in a Fox News interview in October.

‘Will you do that right now?’ Fox News anchor Martha MacCallum asked. 

‘Absolutely,’ Mamdani said, turning to face the camera directly. ‘I’ll apologize to police officers right here because this is the apology that I’ve been sharing with many rank-and-file officers. And I apologize because of the fact that I’m looking to work with these officers, and I know that these officers, these men and women who serve in the NYPD, they put their lives on the line every single day. And I will be a mayor.’

Columbus Day incident

In July, Mamdani sparked a social media firestorm after a post resurfaced of him giving the middle finger to a statue of Christopher Columbus.

‘Take it down,’ Mamdani posted in June 2020, along with a photo showing what is presumably his gloved hand raising the middle finger toward a statue of the famed Italian explorer in Astoria, New York.

In a post around the same time, Mamdani asked his followers in a poll who should be honored instead of Columbus with options that included, ‘Tony Bennett (Astoria native, music icon) Walter Audisio (Communist partisan, killed Mussolini) Sacco & Vanzetti (Executed due to anti-Italian sentiment).’

The winners of the poll were Sacco and Vanzetti, two anarcho-communists executed in 1927.

Some in the Italian community took offense to the post, according to a New York Post report, including Columbus Heritage Coalition President Angelo Vivolo.

‘We will defend Columbus Day and Columbus statues,’ Vivolo said. 

‘He is being disrespectful to the Italian American community.’ Vivolo added. ‘If you offend one community, you offend all communities.’

Despite the criticisms and opposition from high-profile lawmakers across the country, Mamdani’s campaign focused on affordability, pushing back against Trump, and taxing the rich guided him to a commanding victory on Tuesday night.

Mamdani’s victory is expected to be a rallying cry for Republicans as they look to paint him and his socialist agenda as the face of the Democratic Party heading into next year’s midterms. 

‘The Democrat Party has surrendered to radical socialist Zohran Mamdani and the far-left mob who are now running the show,’ National Republican Committee Spokesman Mike Marinella told Fox News Digital on Tuesday night. 

‘They’ve proudly embraced defunding the police, abolishing ICE, taxing hard-working Americans to death, and replacing common sense with chaos. Every House Democrat is foolishly complicit in their party’s collapse, and voters will make them pay in 2026.’ 

Fox News Digital’s Deirdre Heavey contributed to this report.

Senate Democrats are trying to figure out their exit strategy from the ongoing government shutdown as lawmakers on both sides remain cautiously optimistic that the end is near.

At hand are offers Senate Republicans have made since nearly the beginning of the shutdown, which crept into record-breaking territory Tuesday night.

Among the options Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and his caucus mulled were a vote on expiring Obamacare subsidies, attaching a host of spending bills to the government funding extension and likely extending the House-passed continuing resolution (CR) until December or January.

Following a nearly three-hour, closed-door lunch, Schumer gave little indication as to what Democrats’ move would be. He noted that the longer-than-usual caucus lunch went well, and that Senate Democrats were ‘exploring all the options.’

If enough Senate Democrats join Republicans to reopen the government and take up the GOP’s offer, they’d effectively be caving after spending 36 days entrenched in their position that they needed an ironclad deal on the expiring Obamacare premium subsidies.

Like Schumer, many Democratic lawmakers were tight-lipped about their discussions.

‘It’s still a work in progress,’ Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., said.

One part of the equation is tacking on a trio of spending bills, known as a minibus, that would fund military construction and the Department of Veterans Affairs, the legislative branch, and agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration.

Senate appropriators, who have been the main protagonists of increased bipartisan talks, believe that jump-starting the government funding process could be the key to ending the shutdown.

‘The reason we’re in this position is that we have not passed appropriations bills,’ Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., said. ‘So beginning to break the logjam through doing that, we think would be incredibly effective.’

The other part of the equation is a guarantee from Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., that Senate Democrats would get a vote on a bill that dealt with the expiring Obamacare subsidies.

But that attempt is almost certain to fail, given that Senate Republicans want to see major reforms made to the program.

‘It’s a universe that I think is pretty well-defined and established,’ Thune said. ‘I’ve said this before, but the question is whether or not we’ll take ‘yes’ for an answer.’

That’s where the deep-seated lack of trust that Senate Democrats have for their counterparts across the aisle and of President Donald Trump comes in that has underscored much of the shutdown. One of their demands is to have the healthcare bill voted on by a simple, 50-vote majority, which Thune and Republicans scoffed at.

Still, Senate Democrats are eyeing more of a solution to the healthcare issue rather than the promise of a process, which Thune has given.

‘I’m interested in negotiation, but a negotiation that ends up — that ends in a piece of legislation being passed,’ Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., said. ‘An agreement to take a vote that Republicans are guaranteeing will fail doesn’t sound like an outcome that helps regular Americans.’

Others, particularly progressives in the Senate Democratic caucus, don’t want to see Schumer or their colleagues back down, even as federal workers and air traffic controllers go unpaid, and as the administration has wavered on funding federal food benefits despite a court order to do so.

‘If the Democrats cave on this, I think it will be a betrayal to millions and millions of working families who want them to stand up and protect their healthcare benefits,’ Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said.

Despite promises of a vote, Republicans argue they can’t predetermine the future outcome nor guarantee that a Democratic proposal would pass.

‘[Thune] has said from Day 1 that he would provide them with a vote,’ Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., said. ‘What he can’t do is provide them with an outcome.’

Rounds is one of a handful of Senate Republicans who has engaged in bipartisan talks throughout the shutdown and was hopeful that over a dozen Democrats would cross the aisle to reopen the government.

‘I think they’re tired of this,’ Rounds said.

The most consequential moments of the Trump–Xi summit last week did not occur at South Korea’s Gimhae International Airport. Statements about ‘stabilizing relations’ and ‘reducing tensions’ were predictable, almost perfunctory. 

The real story unfolded in the weeks leading up to the summit – in the choreography, the pageantry and the unmistakable assertion of American power across the Indo-Pacific. By the time Xi Jinping sat across from Donald Trump, he was meeting a U.S. president who had already recommitted to America’s military preeminence in the region, reaffirmed its alliances, and reminded Beijing that the United States remains the indispensable Pacific power.

In the days before the summit, Trump delivered a series of moves that together amounted to a strategic message. When reporters aboard Air Force One asked about Taiwan, he replied simply, ‘There’s not that much to ask about it. Taiwan is Taiwan.’ 

The remark – off-the-cuff but unmistakable in meaning – pushed back against speculation that his administration might soften on the issue in pursuit of a grand bargain with Beijing. Trump’s statement told Xi that the United States would not barter away the foundation of East Asian stability for a better trade deal. Since 1979, American policy toward Taiwan has relied on strategic ambiguity – but Trump’s phrasing underscored deterrence, not doubt. 

Then came a tangible demonstration of alliance power. The Trump administration announced a new partnership with a leading South Korean shipbuilder to co-produce nuclear-powered submarines and expand U.S. shipyard capacity – a deal expected to bring billions of dollars in investment and jobs to American facilities, including in Philadelphia and along the Gulf Coast. 

For all the rhetoric about ‘America First,’ this was alliance diplomacy in practice: fusing allied industrial bases to strengthen deterrence. At a time when China is out-building the U.S. Navy at a breathtaking pace, the U.S.–ROK shipbuilding initiative signals that Washington is no longer content to outsource maritime capacity to its competitors.

Equally deliberate was Trump’s decision to post on Truth Social about nuclear-weapons testing – announcing that the United States would resume limited tests to ensure readiness. The statement came in direct response to China’s accelerated nuclear expansion. 

The Pentagon’s 2024 China Military Power Report estimated that Beijing had surpassed 600 operational nuclear warheads and was rapidly expanding its missile forces and fissile-material production capacity. In recent years, satellite imagery and open-source reporting have also suggested that China may be preparing renewed activity at its Lop Nur nuclear test site, reinforcing concerns that Beijing is edging toward a more aggressive testing posture.

In that context, Trump’s post was less provocation than deterrent signaling – a reminder that the U.S. will not allow the balance of nuclear credibility to tilt unchallenged. The move ignited controversy but achieved its purpose: it reassured allies and warned adversaries that American nuclear deterrence is not theoretical.

Perhaps the clearest articulation of this posture came aboard the USS George Washington two days before the summit. Standing on the carrier’s deck alongside Japan’s prime minister, President Trump declared that ‘the U.S. military will win – every time.’ The audience was not voters in the United States. The message was directed at Xi Jinping, the People’s Liberation Army, and America’s allies watching across the Indo-Pacific. 

With the Japanese prime minister by his side – who described the carrier as a ‘symbol of protecting freedom and peace in this region’ – the moment projected allied unity and deterrent resolve. It was as much a visual message as a verbal one: the United States and its partners were back in the business of winning, and Beijing would have to recalibrate its assumptions accordingly.

Taken together – the Taiwan statement, the South Korea shipbuilding accord, the nuclear-testing post, and the carrier speech – the president’s actions framed the summit before it even began. 

These were not the actions of a president declaring detente with Beijing. They told Xi that the United States would not arrive as a supplicant seeking stability at any price, nor should America First to be interpreted as ‘America Alone,’ retreating to the Western Hemisphere.

Instead, President Trump positioned himself at the helm of an American-led order in the Indo-Pacific in which its two most important allies–Japan and South Korea– play leading roles. His message was not isolation but orchestration: America’s strength is amplified through partnership.

This approach marks an evolution from President Trump’s first term, when ‘burden-sharing’ often meant brow-beating allies. Now his focus is on empowerment — accelerating allied shipbuilding, missile defense and joint exercises. 

The summit’s scripted pleasantries – calls for dialogue and vows to ‘manage competition responsibly’ – mattered less than the backdrop: a U.S. president reinforcing alliances, expanding shipbuilding and projecting confidence from ‘100,000 tons of diplomacy’–the deck of an aircraft carrier.

President Trump will return to Beijing in April for a follow-up summit with Xi – a test of whether his current posture endures. As any student of ‘The Art of the Deal’ knows, Trump’s instinct is to maximize leverage before negotiation. 

The handshake between Trump and Xi captured that dynamic: a confident Trump leaning into Xi knowing weeks of U.S. maneuvers had strengthened America’s hand in its competition with China. Whether that grip represents a lasting commitment to Indo-Pacific leadership or merely a pause before the next deal remains to be seen.

Democrat Abigail Spanberger defeated Republican Winsome Earle-Sears to win the Virginia governor’s race, tallying significant leads among reliable Democratic groups while capitalizing on economic worries and the deep unpopularity of President Donald Trump in the state.

Spanberger will be the first woman to hold the office in the Old Dominion State.

The former Virginia congresswoman replaces term-limited Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin, who was the first Republican to win a statewide election in Virginia in 12 years when he was elected in 2021. That race surprised many in that it was much closer than the 2020 presidential race the year before, where Biden defeated Trump by 10 points. This year it was the other way around, with Spanberger well exceeding the 2024 presidential margin that saw Harris over Trump by only six points.

Trump was undoubtedly a factor in the race, even though he wasn’t on the ballot. Close to six in ten Virginia voters disapproved of the job he is doing, while more than half said they strongly disapprove. The vast majority of these voters backed Spanberger.

Two-thirds of Spanberger supporters said their vote was expressly to show opposition to the president. That compares to about one-third of those backing current Lt. Governor Earle-Sears who said theirs was to show support.

Aside from those sending a signal of opposition to Trump, Spanberger’s strong appeal to Black voters, college graduates and the young was more than enough to offset Earle-Sears’ strength among White men, White evangelicals and those with no college degree, according to near-final data from the Fox News Voter Poll, a survey of more than 4,000 Virginia voters.

Not even the prospect of voting for the first Black woman governor of any state seemed to move Black voters, who backed Spanberger by about a nine to one margin.

Spanberger also benefited from a significant gender gap. Indeed, 65% of women backed her compared to 35% for Earle-Sears, a 30-point advantage; and men supported Earle-Sears by 4 points (48% for Spanberger, 52% Earle-Sears) – leaving a gender gap of 34 points, one of the largest in recent memory.

Neither party is very popular in the state, half of voters said they have an unfavorable opinion of Democrats, and more than half felt that way about Republicans.

Between the two candidates, however, Spanberger garnered a net-positive rating – more than half had a favorable opinion of her – compared to Sears, and more than half viewed her unfavorably.

Voters continue to be happy with Youngkin. More than half approved of the job he is doing as governor.

The top characteristic Virginia voters wanted in a candidate was someone who shares their values, followed by someone who is honest and trustworthy.

Values voters broke for Earle-Sears while Spanberger carried those looking for honesty.

Spanberger focused heavily on the economy during the campaign, specifically banging home the deleterious effects that Trump administration efforts to upend government in DC are having on Virginia, home to a large number of federal workers.

More than six in ten of those federal employees backed Spanberger.

The economy was by far the top issue for Virginia voters – with close to half ranking it as the most important. Those voters broke significantly for Spanberger.

Healthcare was the second most important concern – another issue Spanberger hit hard in the wake of the federal government shutdown and people facing the possible loss of health benefits.

Those voters who said healthcare was their number one issue went overwhelmingly for Spanberger – by about four to one.

Overall, Virginia voters – about six in ten – think the economy is doing pretty well. Those voters backed Earle-Sears.

But when it comes to their own family’s finances, most said they were either holding steady or falling behind. Both of those groups went for Spanberger.

And of the six in ten voters who said the federal budget cuts had affected their family finances, they backed Spanberger as well.

Two issues that got significant attention from Earle-Sears in the campaign were controversies about trans rights, and the disclosure of violent texts from the Democratic candidate for Attorney General.

Fewer than half of voters found the texts sent by Democrat Jay Jones, threatening a fellow lawmaker, disqualifying from the job of attorney general. Those who did broke strongly for Earle-Sears.

The rest, though – who said the texts were concerning but not disqualifying, were not a concern, or who simply didn’t know enough – went strongly for Spanberger.

It was suspected that some voters might split their votes, backing Spanberger for governor but Republican Jason Miyares for attorney general. That did not happen. Those Democrats defecting to Miyares remained in the single digits, and Jones was declared the winner.

On transgender rights, voters have mixed views. Half said support has gone too far – the position Earle-Sears took, with special emphasis on its effect on schools and girls’ sports. The other half, however, said support has not gone far enough, or it’s been about right.

Those who said it’d gone too far backed Earle-Sears by almost four to one, while those who disagreed went hard for Spanberger.

In the end, the headwinds of Trump’s unpopularity and the ire of the vast number of federal workers in the state was too much for Earle-Sears to overcome.

Only about a third of Virginia voters are happy with the direction the country is going, and while these voters overwhelmingly backed Earle-Sears, the other two-thirds went big for Spanberger. Of the four in ten who are actually angry about how things are going, almost all of them – more than nine in ten – backed Spanberger.

Asked about Trump’s immigration enforcement efforts, more than half say it has gone too far, and, perhaps not surprisingly, most of these voters backed Spanberger.

Almost all Democrats voted for Spanberger, as did a few Republicans. Earle-Sears was unable to generate any sort of crossover appeal, while winning most Republicans. The small group of independents favored Spanberger.

The Fox News Voter Poll is based on a survey conducted by SSRS with Virginia registered voters. This survey was conducted October 22 to November 4, 2025, concluding at the end of voting on Election Day. The poll combines data collected from registered voters online and by telephone with data collected in-person from Election Day voters at 30 precincts per state/city. In the final step, all the pre-election survey respondents and Election Day exit poll respondents are combined by adjusting the share of voting mode (absentee, early-in-person, and Election Day) based on the estimated composition of the state/city’s final electorate. Once votes are counted, the survey results are also weighted to match the overall results in each state. Results among more than 4,500 Virginia voters interviewed have an estimated margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2.1 percentage points, including the design effects. The error margin is larger among subgroups.

U.S. Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth on Tuesday lauded South Korea’s plans to boost its military spending and take on a larger role in defending itself from North Korea’s aggression.

The U.S. has wanted South Korea to increase its conventional defense capabilities so that Washington can center its attention on China.

Hegseth spoke to reporters after annual security talks with South Korean Defense Minister Ahn Gyu-back in Seoul, where he said he was ‘greatly encouraged’ by Seoul’s commitment to raising defense spending and making greater investments in its own military capabilities.

He said the two allies agreed that the investments would boost South Korea’s ability to lead its conventional deterrence against its northern foe.

South Korean President Lee Jae Myung, in a speech to parliament Tuesday, asked lawmakers to approve an 8.2% increase in defense spending next year. The president said the increase in spending would help modernize the military’s weapons systems and reduce its reliance on the U.S.

Hegseth noted defense cooperation on repairing and maintaining U.S. warships in South Korea, stressing that the activities harness South Korea’s shipbuilding capabilities and ‘ensure our most lethal capabilities remain ready to respond to any crisis.’

‘We face, as we both acknowledge, a dangerous security environment, but our alliance is stronger than ever,’ Hegseth said.

Hegseth said the South Korea-U.S. alliance is primarily meant to respond to potential North Korean aggression, but other regional threats must also be addressed.

‘There’s no doubt flexibility for regional contingencies is something we would take a look at, but we are focused on standing by our allies here and ensuring the threat of the [Democratic People’s Republic of Korea] is not a threat to the Republic of Korea and certainly continue to extend nuclear deterrence as we have before,’ he said.

In recent years, the U.S. and South Korea have discussed how to integrate U.S. nuclear weapons and South Korean conventional weapons.

South Korea has no nuclear weapons, and Ahn denied speculation that it could eventually seek its own nuclear weapons program or that it is pushing for redeployment of U.S. tactical weapon weapons that were removed from South Korea in the 1990s.

Earlier Tuesday, South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said the country detected North Korea test-firing around 10 rounds of artillery toward its western waters on Monday, shortly before Hegseth arrived at an inter-Korean border village with Ahn to begin his two-day visit to South Korea.

Hegseth visited the Demilitarized Zone on the border with North Korea earlier in the week.

Iranian hackers taunted former National Security Advisor John Bolton about files allegedly obtained from his email account that they said were classified, wishing ‘good luck’ to ‘Mr. Mustache’ as they threatened to leak the materials, an unsealed search warrant affidavit reviewed by Fox News Digital revealed.

Bolton pleaded not guilty in October to eight counts of transmission of national defense information and ten counts of retention of national defense information. He had been indicted on 18 counts related to the improper handling of classified materials. 

It was July 2021 when Bolton’s assistant contacted the FBI via email to alert the agency that Iran had obtained access to Bolton’s email account, according to the affidavit. Bolton’s team had notified the FBI that it would be deleting Bolton’s emails so the hackers could not obtain any additional sensitive information. 

Weeks later, Bolton’s assistant contacted the FBI again to say he had received threatening emails that were believed to be related to the hack of Bolton’s AOL account.

‘The e-mail, the subject of which was ‘Re:New PW,’ as forwarded to the FBI, stated: ‘I do not think you would be interested in the FBI being aware of the leaked content of John’s email (some of which have been attached), especially after the recent acquittal. This could be the biggest scandal since Hillary’s emails were leaked, but this time on the GOP side! Contact me before it’s too late,’’ according to the warrant.

In August 2021, Bolton’s assistant flagged another email from the same account that threatened to leak portions of Bolton’s manuscript found in his email.

‘OK John…as you want (apparently), we’ll disseminate the expurgated sections of your book by reference to your leaked email,’ the email said. ‘Good luck Mr. Mustache!’

The affidavit in support of the search warrant from a raid on Bolton’s home in September was unsealed and obtained by Fox News Digital. 

The affidavit supporting the search warrant revealed additional details about the case against Bolton.

‘CLASSIFIED INFORMATION’

According to the unsealed warrant, staff from the White House National Security Council visited Bolton’s home Sept. 10, 2019, to retrieve classified information and any government property after his termination as national security advisor.

The government had created a sensitive compartmented information facility, also known as a SCIF, in Bolton’s home Sept. 17, 2018. That SCIF was decertified Oct. 16, 2019, according to the warrant.

‘Based on my education, training and experience, I know that the installation of a SCIF within the TARGET RESIDENCE indicated that Bolton anticipated storing classified materials within the TARGET RESIDENCE during his tenure as APNSA,’ the affidavit states. 

‘Once he was no longer APNSA, effective Sept. 10, 2019, his need-to-know expired, and any authorization for having access to the classified documents in the TARGET RESIDENCE was subsequently revoked.’

It was December 2019 when Bolton submitted a draft of his manuscript of ‘The Room Where It Happened,’ his memoir, to Ellen Knight, the National Security Council senior director for records, access and information security management.

Knight acknowledged receipt of the manuscript, according to the warrant, and notified Bolton that ‘based on a preliminary review, the manuscript appeared to contain significant amounts of classified information, to include information classified at the TOP SECRET level.’

Knight suggested Bolton modify and resubmit the manuscript due to the ‘large volume of classified information contained’ in it.

‘Knight indicated that, in all her experience, she had never seen that level of classified material and specificity of detail in a manuscript submitted for review,’ the affidavit said. ‘There were quotes from foreign leaders from negotiations with the President and details of foreign military actions which had not yet been publicly acknowledged by the foreign governments.

‘Based on her experience in reviewing manuscripts for pre-publication review and the level of detail contained in Bolton’s submission, Knight surmised that Bolton either had an incredible memory or had to be writing from notes he would have taken as APNSA. Knight explained that any such notes were likely classified, fall under the PRA, and should have been turned over by Bolton at the conclusion of his government service,’ the affidavit read. 

But on Dec. 13, 2019, Bolton’s team confirmed he had cleared classified documents and did not possess any additional classified documents at his home.

The affidavit, though, revealed that in February 2020, Bolton’s assistant wrote an email to the National Security Council to notify it that Bolton was reinstalling a SCIF in his home and needed the contact information for someone at the National Security Council who could accredit the SCIF. That was unusual, according to the warrant, given Bolton was no longer an employee of the U.S. government. 

The National Security Council director of security responded the same day, telling Bolton and his team that installing an accredited SCIF in his home was ‘not a viable option.’ 

It was more than a year later that Bolton’s AOL email account was hacked by a foreign entity, believed to be Iran.

Meanwhile, while Bolton attempted, and failed, to get a second SCIF accredited in his home, Bolton continued to refer to ‘the archives’ in emails to himself and to two other individuals, whose identities remain redacted.

The warrant states that Bolton would designate ‘certain information’ for ‘the archive,’ which the warrant states is likely a physical space within his home.

‘POLITICAL REASONS’ 

The probe into Bolton’s alleged retention of classified documents was first launched years ago but later shut down by the Biden administration ‘for political reasons,’ according to a senior U.S. official.

The Justice Department during Trump’s first administration argued that Bolton’s 2020 memoir contained classified material and sought to block its publication. A federal judge ultimately allowed the book to be published.

Justice Department lawyers argued the book contained classified national security information covering areas like U.S. intelligence sources and methods, foreign policy deliberations and conversations with foreign leaders.

In June 2021, the Biden Justice Department abandoned both a criminal inquiry and civil lawsuit against Bolton over the memoir, ending the legal battle at that time.

Bolton’s attorney said at the time that a senior career official in charge of the National Security Council’s pre-publication review process conducted a four-month review of the book and, after requiring a number of revisions, concluded that it contained no classified information.

The book contained a damning account of the Trump White House, alleging that Trump once ‘pleaded’ with Chinese President Xi Jinping to aid his re-election campaign, among other missteps.

Trump ousted Bolton from his first administration in 2019 because the pair ‘disagreed strongly’ on policy. 

Bolton has both praised and criticized Trump since leaving his first administration. 

He criticized Trump’s handling of classified documents, which led to an FBI raid on the former president’s Mar-a-Lago home in 2022 and a subsequent federal indictment but insisted that ‘the legal process play out.’

Trump initially was indicted on 37 felony counts, later expanded to 40, but the case was ultimately dismissed in July 2024.

In 2022, Bolton said Trump lacked the competence and character to be president.

However, Bolton strongly backed Trump’s military strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities in June, calling it ‘a decisive action,’ ‘the right thing to do’ and praising its potential to generate ‘huge change in the Middle East.’

Trump, meanwhile, often has criticized Bolton for pushing U.S. involvement in wars in the Middle East. Bolton served as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations under President George W. Bush from August 2005 to December 2006.

Trump revoked Bolton’s Secret Service detail Jan. 21, the day after Trump’s inauguration as the 47th president, and Bolton said the move showed that Trump was coming after him.

‘I think it is a retribution presidency,’ Bolton told ABC earlier in 2025, responding to Trump’s move to revoke his security clearance.

Bolton has faced threats from Iran going back years, including an alleged plot to assassinate him in 2021 and the Department of Justice subsequently charging a member of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps for the plot in 2022.

The Iranian threats against Bolton were likely sparked by the January 2020 U.S. strike that killed Qassem Soleimani, the head of Iran’s Quds Force, the Department of Justice reported in 2022. 

Bolton pleaded not guilty to 18 counts in October.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Timothy Sullivan explained the charges to Bolton and asked if he understood them and the potential penalties of up to ten years per count and a maximum fine of $250,000 per count. 

‘I do your honor,’ Bolton said during his arraignment at the federal courthouse in Greenbelt, Maryland. 

‘From on or about April 9, 2018, through at least on or about August 22, 2025, BOLTON abused his position as National Security Advisor by sharing more than a thousand pages of information about his day-to-day activities as the National Security Advisor — including information relating to the national defense which was classified up to the TOP SECRET/SCI level — with two unauthorized individuals, namely Individuals 1 and 2,’ the indictment states. 

‘BOLTON also unlawfully retained documents, writings, and notes relating to the national defense, including information classified up to the TOP SECRET/SCI level, in his home in Montgomery County, Maryland.’

The documents Bolton allegedly transmitted were sent to two individuals unauthorized to view classified documents, the indictment said.

Those documents, according to the indictment, revealed intelligence about future attacks by an adversarial group in another country, a liaison partner sharing sensitive information with the U.S. intelligence community, intelligence that a foreign adversary was planning a missile launch in the future and a covert action in a foreign country that was related to sensitive intergovernmental actions, among other information.

‘The FBI’s investigation revealed that John Bolton allegedly transmitted top-secret information using personal online accounts and retained said documents in his house in direct violation of federal law,’ said FBI Director Kash Patel. 

‘The case was based on meticulous work from dedicated career professionals at the FBI who followed the facts without fear or favor. Weaponization of justice will not be tolerated, and this FBI will stop at nothing to bring to justice anyone who threatens our national security.’

Bolton did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

President Donald Trump has nominated Elon Musk ally Jared Isaacman to serve as NASA administrator again, after yanking his nomination for the role earlier in 2025. 

Trump originally tapped Isaacman, a commercial astronaut and founder and CEO of payment processing company Shift4 Payments, for the post, but Trump rescinded his nomination in May amid tension between the president and Musk.

‘Jared’s passion for Space, astronaut experience, and dedication to pushing the boundaries of exploration, unlocking the mysteries of the universe, and advancing the new Space economy, make him ideally suited to lead NASA into a bold new Era,’ Trump said in a social media post Tuesday.

Trump originally said when he revoked Isaacman’s nomination for the position that the move came after ‘a thorough review of prior associations.’

Furthermore, Trump said he would select a ‘new Nominee who will be Mission aligned, and put America First in Space.’

Isaacman’s ties to Musk include being an investor in SpaceX, and leading two private spaceflight missions with SpaceX, including Inspiration4. The 2021 Inspiration4 mission marked the first time an all-civilian crew orbited Earth.

Isaacman initially discussed his pulled nomination in an episode of the ‘All-In Podcast,’ hosted by four venture capitalists and covers business, technology and society, in an episode that dropped in June. At the time, Isaacman said he received a call from the White House May 30 notifying him his nomination wouldn’t advance because the White House had ‘decided to go in a different direction.’ 

Isaacman said he suspected his ties to Musk were part of the decision, and said the call came the same day Musk’s tenure heading up the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) finished.  

‘I don’t need to play dumb on this,’ Isaacman said in the podcast. ‘I don’t think that the timing was much of a coincidence, that there were other changes going on the same day.’

Trump and Musk sparred earlier in 2025 due to disagreements about the president’s massive tax and spending package, known as the ‘big, beautiful bill,’ which Trump signed into law in July. 

While Musk said at the time he opposed the bill because of reports it would increase the federal deficit, Trump said Musk didn’t back the measure because of provisions included to cut an electric vehicle tax credit that benefits companies like Musk’s Tesla.

However, the two appear to have moved on, and both were seen shaking hands and talking during conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s funeral in September. 

Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy has been serving as the acting NASA administrator since July. 

The nation’s largest food aid program will only resume in full when ‘Radical Left Democrats’ open the government, President Donald Trump wrote Tuesday on social media.

Trump posted about the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) on his Truth Social platform, saying that the benefits, meant to be a lifeline for low-income households, were given out too freely under former President Joe Biden, sending costs skyrocketing.

‘SNAP BENEFITS, which increased by Billions and Billions of Dollars (MANY FOLD!) during Crooked Joe Biden’s disastrous term in office (Due to the fact that they were haphazardly ‘handed’ to anyone for the asking, as opposed to just those in need, which is the purpose of SNAP!), will be given only when the Radical Left Democrats open up government, which they can easily do, and not before!’ the president’s post read.

Trump’s post comes as funding for the program was set to expire over the weekend as the government shutdown entered its second month.

On Monday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., signaled that the expiration of funding may not be enough to persuade Democrats to end the government shutdown.

When asked if Democrats voting for the GOP federal funding bill would be the most prudent way to fix that, he said, ‘No.’

The Trump administration told a federal judge on Monday that it will partially resume SNAP benefits for the month of November despite the ongoing government shutdown, though when the payments will be distributed — and how much beneficiaries will receive — remains to be seen.

A senior Trump administration official told the court in a sworn declaration that the U.S. Department of Agriculture will allocate $4.65 billion of its $5 billion contingency fund to keep the SNAP program funded for the month of November.

SNAP supports more than 40 million Americans and has come under recent attention over how expansive the program has become and to the administration’s push to ensure illegal immigrants aren’t among its recipients.

The program was among the first that Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins targeted for review, citing concerns about eligibility and oversight.

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., recently pushed new legislation seeking special funding for farmers and food assistance programs amid the government shutdown. The legislation would reinstate federal funding for the Farm Service Agency and SNAP.

‘We need to start forcing Democrats to make some tough votes. We need to start holding their feet to the fire,’ Hawley said in an interview with Fox News Digital last month. ‘I mean, do they really not want people to be able to eat? This situation is ridiculous.’

Fox News Digital reached out to Hawley’s office for comment on Trump’s most recent post about SNAP but did not immediately hear back.

Fox News Digital’s Amanda Macias, Elizabeth Elkind, Breanne Deppisch and Anders Hagstrom contributed to this report.

Senate Democrats blocked Republicans’ attempt to reopen the government for a 14th time, all but ensuring that the government shutdown becomes the longest in U.S. history.

The move to again reject the House-passed continuing resolution (CR) comes as winds of optimism and exhaustion have swept through the upper chamber. Lawmakers are engaging in more bipartisan talks, and more believe that an off-ramp is in sight.

Still, Tuesday morning’s vote against the CR came as the shutdown matched the previous 35-day record set in 2019, and it all but ensured that it would surpass that unfortunate milestone later on in the evening.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and his Democratic caucus are still largely entrenched in their position that unless an ironclad deal on expiring Obamacare subsidies is struck, they won’t reopen the government.

During a speech on the Senate floor, Schumer squarely placed the blame for the healthcare issue on Republicans and President Donald Trump as Americans got notices of increased premiums over the weekend. 

‘The only plan Republicans have for healthcare seems to be to eliminate it, and then to tell working people to go figure it out on their own,’ he said. ‘That’s not a healthcare plan. That’s cruel.’ 

However, his caucus’ resolve showed signs of weakening on Monday, when a group of nearly a dozen Senate Democrats met behind closed doors to discuss a way out.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said he was optimistic about the shutdown coming to an end soon, but he wasn’t confident that it would be by the end of this week.

He noted that Republicans have made a plethora of options available to Senate Democrats, including guaranteeing a vote on the expiring subsidies, or ‘whatever their Obamacare bill is,’ after the government reopens. When asked if he believed lawmakers were close to reaching an end, he said, ‘I hope close.’ 

‘But the pressures, the cross pressures that everybody’s feeling, are great,’ Thune said. ‘But I think there are people who realize this has gone on long enough and that there’s been enough pain inflicted on the American people, and it’s time to end it. So we’ll see whether that’s, you know, sufficient numbers are there.’

Then there’s the reality that the current end date of Nov. 21 for the House-passed CR doesn’t give lawmakers enough time to advance funding bills, which has been a primary objective for Thune and others. And, many don’t want to reopen the government just to see it close back down a few weeks later.

Lawmakers are mulling extending the current CR, either by amending it or with a new bill, which would give them enough time to finish spending bills and avoid a colossal, year-end omnibus spending bill. Some are eyeing January, while others would prefer an extension into December. A trio of spending bills, known as a minibus, could also be tied to the revamped extension.

Those talks are happening parallel to discussions on Obamacare, but neither side has so far made a move to fully construct an off-ramp out of the shutdown.

When asked if he believed that the shutdown could end this week, Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., who has routinely engaged in bipartisan talks since the shutdown began, said, ‘I don’t know, I hope so.’

‘Bottom line is they can stop all this with one vote and get back into it and get back to work on a bipartisan basis,’ he said. ‘Again, that’s what we’re hoping.’

Both sides recognize that changing the subsidies, either through reforms or impacting the rates, will be difficult given that insurers already released rates and guidance over the weekend in line with the start of open enrollment.

Still, lawmakers are discussing a path forward on the subsidies. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who has been involved in bipartisan talks, said that her proposal for the subsidies would extend them for two years.

She noted that it would be, ‘Really, really hard to do any reforms right now,’ because the insurance rates had been released, and that her proposal was one of many in the mix.

Ultimately, it’ll come down to the right blend of ideas to build an off-ramp for the subsidies. Murkowski said that changing the income cap, which was eliminated when the subsidies were enhanced under former President Joe Biden, and changes to the low-cost premium contribution were just a couple ideas on the table.

‘There’s no highly brand-new thing that anybody’s really talking about,’ she said. ‘It’s just what’s the right concoction?’

But some Senate Democrats are frustrated that Trump has not gotten more involved and argue that unless he gives an explicit greenlight, any deal crafted on the Hill doesn’t matter.

Trump has agreed to meet with Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., only after the government reopens. And over the weekend, he demanded that Senate Republicans nuke the 60-vote filibuster threshold, something that is unlikely to happen any time soon, if ever.

‘At no point since Oct. 1 has Donald Trump agreed to sit down with Democratic leaders,’ Sen. Andy Kim, D-N.J., said. ‘So, he can talk all he wants about the filibuster, but until he actually puts some skin in the game and sits down and talks to us, like, that is all meaningless to me. And I honestly, like, don’t care about him pontificating this stuff on social media. Like, if he’s got time to tweet, he’s got time to just come and talk to us.’

As the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas continues to play out, the USAID Office of the Inspector General (USAID OIG) pursues its investigation into allegations of U.S. taxpayer dollars being diverted to foreign terrorist organizations.

A U.S. diplomatic official briefed on USAID OIG’s ongoing investigations told Fox News Digital that the OIG’s office ‘received and continues to receive reports directly from aid workers and other parties on the ground that counters the sanitized narrative that Hamas was never involved in the theft of American funded aid.’ The official reported that reports are still being ‘sent in by whistleblowers and aid workers who are fed up with the U.N.’s failure to identify Hamas as the culprit.’

USAID OIG issued its first warnings about the possible diversion of American aid to Gaza in Nov. 2023, noting that it was an ‘investigative priority to ensure that assistance does not fall into the hands of foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs), including, but not limited to, Hamas.’

In a July 30 update, USAID OIG reported that it was ‘investigating credible allegations of Hamas interference, diversion, and theft of humanitarian aid in Gaza, as well as allegations of smuggling contraband into Gaza through humanitarian aid shipments.’

The United Nations has admitted that most of the aid it sent into Gaza after May 2025 was diverted by armed actors and hungry Gazans. Yet the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs has stated that Hamas was not responsible for widespread aid diversion.

In July, Reuters reported that a USAID analysis found little evidence of Hamas theft of Gaza aid, something the State Department and the White House disputed. Anna Kelly, a White House spokesperson, told Reuters that it ‘was likely produced by a deep state operative,’ seeking to discredit President Donald Trump’s ‘humanitarian agenda.’

Over half of USAID programming is obligated to U.N. organizations. However, the USAID OIG reported in July 2024 that since October 2023, it had received ’17 reports of alleged misconduct from five USAID-funded implementers,’ only two of which were submitted by U.N. organizations.

The OIG also noted that U.N. organizations were exempt from USAID’s partner vetting process, which ‘creates risk to USAID’s programs.’

The diplomatic source also reported seeing U.N. duplicity over food deliveries into Gaza firsthand. The source attended Joint Coordination Board meetings where officials from the Israel Defense Forces, U.S. Army, U.S. aid organizations, the U.N. and the International Committee of the Red Cross had ‘robust, extensive, and productive’ discussions about aid deliveries and appeared to share ‘a sense of mission.’

‘It was shocking then to read press releases by those same U.N. agencies, the very next day totally body-slamming the government of Israel for failing to coordinate delivery of aid,’ the official said.

Much of the USAID OIG’s effort since the outbreak of war following Hamas’ Oct. 7 attacks has concerned Hamas’ infiltration of the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).

The office concluded an investigation in April 2025 that found three UNRWA members were connected with the Oct. 7 attack and another 14 were affiliates of Hamas.

UNRWA previously fired nine employees for their association with the attacks, according to reports.

In July, USAID OIG reported being ‘unable to obtain from UNRWA’ the names of the personnel it fired.

The diplomatic source said that the USAID OIG investigators ‘opened an independent investigation, obtaining information that UNRWA refused to provide through other sources and methods,’ with the goal of ensuring ‘that UNRWA officials associated with Hamas do not recirculate to other U.S. taxpayer-funded organizations operating in Gaza,’ the official said.

Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., has begun an investigation into UNRWA staff participation in the Oct. 7 attacks, which led to over 1,200 Israelis and 32 Americans being killed and 251 people taken hostage.

In an open letter to U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres dated Oct. 27, Comer requested unredacted copies of a U.N. Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) report into UNRWA participation in the deadly attack and asked for correspondence and other details about staff who were investigated for their possible roles.

Comer noted that the U.S. provides 22% of the U.N.’s general budget, 40% of its humanitarian budget and 25% of its peacekeeping budget, in addition to providing $343 million in 2022 and $422 million in 2023 to UNRWA. ‘The requested documents and communications are required for verification that no U.N. entity or NGO receiving American taxpayer funds employs individuals affiliated with or supporting terrorist entities,’ Comer said.

Stéphane Dujarric, spokesperson for Guterres, told Fox News Digital that the U.N. has been ‘sharing information with the United States government on matters raised in the letter. We are presently considering the committee’s request and intend to respond with relevant information.’ Dujarric said he would ‘not say anything more publicly at this time.’

William Deere, director of the UNRWA Representative Office in Washington, D.C., told Fox News Digital that ‘the United Nations provided the USAID IG with an unredacted copy of the U.N. Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) investigation report months ago. To suggest information is being withheld from the U.S. is simply disingenuous. Following the government of Israel’s initial allegations in January of 2024 of potential UNRWA staff misconduct, Commissioner-General Lazzarini immediately terminated the appointments of the named staff ‘in the interest of the Agency,’ to protect UNRWA’s ability to deliver humanitarian assistance.’

Deere claimed that, ‘regrettably, since that time the government of Israel has failed to provide the United States, the United Nations, or UNRWA with the information and evidence that would substantiate its claims against UNRWA employees. Significantly, the government of Israel has also failed to take action against any of the named individuals in their own judicial system. The record is clear, UNRWA investigates every claim brought to it of potential employee misconduct, as evidenced by the multiple requests the agency has made to the Israeli government for the information in these cases.’

The U.S. diplomatic official familiar with UNRWA’s investigation disputes the U.N.’s assertion that members of Hamas do not remain on UNRWA’s payroll, saying that ‘Perhaps ‘some’ of the Oct. 7 terrorists were removed, but UNRWA continues to employ Hamas members, there is no question. They are a subsidiary of Hamas.’

A report on Monday by the Washington Free Beacon said a confidential copy of the U.N. Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) report on UNRWA members’ participation in the Oct. 7 attack claimed to show that OIOS dismissed the evidence provided by Israeli intelligence of intercepted calls between Hamas personnel and UNRWA staff as ‘likely authentic’ but ‘insufficient’ proof of cooperation to support the firing of 10 additional UNRWA employees. Additionally, the report said that the U.N. ‘did not investigate ties to Hamas outside participation in the Oct. 7 attacks.’

Foundation for Defense of Democracies Senior Advisor Richard Goldberg told Fox News Digital that ‘UNRWA was Hamas in Gaza. It remains a terror and radicalization threat elsewhere. When Israel banned UNRWA in Gaza, it was quickly replaced by other U.N. agencies and NGOs. UNRWA proved neither indispensable nor irreplaceable — a lie repeated by many.’

‘We also need to dismantle the entire agency in the context of deradicalization,’ Goldberg said. ‘Oct. 7 will keep happening again and again so long as UNRWA exists. The Trump plan will fail where UNRWA is present. Arab countries are making peace with Israel. UNRWA is still waging the war of 1948.’

USAID OIG confirmed that its ‘investigations of UNRWA officials affiliated with Hamas are active and ongoing, and intended to prevent the recirculation of terrorists to other U.S.-funded organizations operating in Gaza.’

In response to questions about whether the State Department had utilized the USAID OIG report on UNRWA members’ participation in Oct. 7 attacks, a spokesperson told Fox News Digital that ‘As a general matter, the department does not comment on internal or investigative reports, nor on actions that may be under consideration. UNRWA was complicit in Oct. 7 and is unfit for purpose. Our policy is that it will not play a role in Gaza again.’